What is the Scriptural Basis for Cessationism?

[Mark Quayle]

"An evil and perverse generation seeks a sign." Far be it from the mature in Christ to grasp at what glitters and shines.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

So here we are debating something that wasn't a debate until the Holiness movement and after them the Pentecostal movement came onto the scene roughly give or take 1,800+ years into Christianity. Makes no sense that God would withhold the gift of prophecy for so long and from so many giants of the faith. Makes no sense considering the "fruit" of so many wanna be prophets. Continualism huh?

Ephesians 2:20 "having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone,"

So assuming continualism, to be consistent, we would have to assume a continuation of the offices of prophet and apostle, no?

No thanks, I'll pass.

 

[Major1]

Yes, Neo, the coming of the Bible is in their eyes "the perfect". How they arrive at that conclusion is beyond me

Other than the Bible, what other "Perfect" has come to the earth?

It has to be Jesus Christ and He has already come. So then if we say the Bible that is correct. If we say Jesus that is correct as well.

 

[Major1]

All cessationest agree that the Bible is complete. It makes no difference how many of us disagree or how much we disagree on, it's has nothing to do with the matter at hand. But if we want to go that road, I could just as easily say the same of countinualist, I'm sure all of don't belive you can teach a person how to speak in tounges.

I belive tounges are genuine when I see them used as such.
Why would Paul need to tell the Corinthians that they won't need tounges anymore after Christ return, it would be obvious. Yet Paul is correcting the Corinthians on thier improper use of tounges.

The foreigners were the interpertators.

Diverse kinds of tounges is the same as saying diverse kinds of languages.
"Speaking in the tounges of angels" is a hyperbolic expression, Paul continues on to say " if I have not love, I'm like resounding gong."

Understanding teleion as a reference to the completed canon has several advantages. First, the meaning “complete,” or “whole,” is well attested in Paul’s writings.

Second, the adjective teleion is used elsewhere in the New Testament to describe God’s Word (James 1:25).

Third, and most importantly, the canon view does not pit a quantitative concept (ek merous) against a qualitative concept, as do the ideal and maturity views. It allows both expressions to be understood quantitatively. In other, words, the concept of “complete” is a natural antithesis to the concept of “in part.”

Thus, the idea of completed Scripture furnishes the best antithesis to the partial revelations given through the gifts of knowledge, prophecy, and tongues, because both expressions are taken in a quantitative sense.
The Meaning of "The Perfect" in 1 Corinthians 13:8-13

 

[Major1]

The first of the four categories of Christians I will try to describe are

1. the Cessationists themselves. As seen obviously here in this thread, they are not a group with agreed-upon reasons that tongues/prophecy/word of knowledge have ceased; they are just dead-sure that they have ceased

2. by far the majority of Christians in the world today NEITHER speak in tongues/prophesy/declare a Word of Knowledge NOR do they adamantly claim these things cannot happen today, the gifts are not a part of their ongoing worship, yet they know, sitting in their Presbyterian or Baptist church that the Assembly of God church a block down the road has members speaking in tongues all the time and exhibiting gifts -- well, even if they don't know it, they have no SET POSITION against it happening. These are the biggest of the four groups

3. the Pentecostals and Charismatics who go to churches where sign-gifts are a regular part of worship. Unfortunately there may be a minority in this group who over-boardedly claim that speaking in Tongues is something every Christian should do. No. Paul asks the rhetorical question "do all speak with tongues?" and a no is assumed. The extremists who say you must speak in tongues to be saved are clearly mistaken.

4. Christians who have had the charismatic experience yet remain in denominations where the gifts are not a regular main part of worship. I am in this category. I visited pentecostal and assembly of God churches much, but I like Methodism. I attended for a while a charismatic Episcopal church and they went strictly by the book of one message in tongues at a time and it must be interpreted. This was quite different from a whole crowd of prayer-languagers raising hands and speaking en masse. I also attended some Charismatic Catholic services.

These are just broad general categories. As I have said, #2 is by far the largest population.

Adding apostleship and miracles and healing to the three designated gifts that will eventually expire is not warranted -- and Paul did not say he was "the last apostle" -- he said Christ appeared to him last out of those listed

1Co 15:5
And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
1Co 15:6
After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
1Co 15:7
After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
1Co 15:8
And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
1Co 15:9
For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

Paul said he was last to see Christ of those mentioned, not that he was the last apostle.
He said in next verse he was LEAST of the apostles, not LAST of the apostles.

As best as I can recall, I do not remember one single Scripture that even suggests the continuation of the office of apostle in the Bible.

Paul uses the adjectival noun, teleios, in place of explicitly saying, the Word (Scriptures) because...…………...

A) it is already familiar to his audience Jm 1:25 as James referred to the Word in the context of spiritual maturity. Paul frames the context by giving examples of personal maturity to announce the same.

B) Paul used the mirror analog just as James had which serves to identify the Adjectival noun, Teleios, as being the same as James use of Teleios, Perfect Law of Liberty (which came from the written Word).

C) The James reference to the adjective "teleios" being associated with the Word was clear to the Corinthians because they had already read the book of James.

D) James 1:1 states that the book was addressed to the dispersed 12 tribes... therefore God Himself would have made sure the Jews in Corinth would read the book of James.

E) 1 Cor 15:7 "After that He was seen by James, then by all the apostles." Paul name drops James as though the Corinthian audience would somehow all know this James well enough to be a credible witness to the resurrection of Christ. This James by virtue of being an eye witness to the resurrection of Christ and the whole of Corinth Believers not being originally from the Land it must be understood that Paul considers the Corinthians to have come to know this James via Jame's earlier letter to them.
1 Corinthians 13:10 - What does "The Perfect" Refer to?

 

[Major1]

Yes, Inner, you know me from Christforums.
And yes, as it was posted before, Cessationists disagree among themselves -- with some even in this thread taking the "completed Bible" angle, and one saying even the writer of Hebrews excluded himself from the era of the sign gifts, and it was also said that a church reaching maturity caused the gifts to cease. Hebrews was written before there was a completed New Testament.

So we see that Cessationists are "the blind men describing the elephant".
Some touched his trunk, tail or side and say "elephant is like a tree, rope, wall" or whatever.

About counterfeiting, this is a ridiculous point, equating to saying that because counterfeit money exists (which it undoubtedly does) that our genuine currency is not valid. That's silly. And it could be more serious than "play-acting" when the gifts are faked and not genuine, it may be human fakery or in some cases it could be satanic/demonic.

The eisogesis of the Cessationists is quite plain in two instances even in this thread so far-

1. assuming that "the perfect" means completed NT while the Bible does not say that,

2. and assuming the writer of Hebrews excludes himself from sign gift era when, in context, the THEM means those who actually heard the Lord, he is only excluding himself from those that heard the Lord teach.

Cessationists "touch the parts of the elephant" that concern tongues at Pentecost; failing to read that Paul says there are diverse kinds of tongues; they hammer in on Acts ch 2 as if that is the only use, purpose, or instance of Tongues -- it is not. Paul speaks of "the tongues of men and of angels" -- so the "human language only" crock is shut down and seen as invalid. Paul says he will pray in the spirit as well as pray with understanding also -- so much for the elephant-touchers who claim prayer language is invalid.

The PERFECT is something yet to come -- when Christ comes back -- this far from perfect world has had the New Testament for centuries.

Another huge difference from 'tongues at Pentecost' vs 'tongues later on in New Testament' is that at Pentecost NO INTERPRETATION WAS REQUIRED - the foreigners HEARD THE APOSTLES IN THEIR OWN LANGUAGES! But later we see Paul saying someone who speaks in tongues should have it INTERPRETED; that can be by the speaker OR someone else.

But usually those Cessationists who have a bee in their bonnet for disclaiming tongues/sign gifts today totally ignore anything but the FIRST INSTANCE of tongues at Acts ch 2, completely ignoring 'diverse kinds of tongues' or 'tongues of men and of angels'.

Dave Miller, Ph.D, Apologetics Press :...…..
"... the exegete is forced to conclude that Paul’s use of “perfect” referred to the completed revelation or totally revealed New Testament Scriptures."

Robert L. Thomas, Understanding the Spiritual Gifts, pg. 130 ……..
"... a completion of the revelatory gifts coincided with the completion of the New Testament".

According to Marshall in Nestle’s Interlinear Greek-English New Testament,
Teleion is in the neuter gender and renders it, "the perfect thing."

The Greek teleion simply describes action that is essentially progressive. The action was begun at the point of inception, continues in the proper course, and then it arrives at its destination. This latter state is the idea of teleion. Teleion, then, is the arrived at state, the state to which all anterior action looked, the goal to which all previous forward effort and action was directed.

Hence, teleion is complete or the completed as opposed to "in part" or fragmentary. That in no way describes Jesus Christ either in His 1st coming or His 2nd Coming as He was Perfect all the time and did not arrive at a state of perfection.
That Which Is Perfect

 

[Major1]

All cessationest agree that the Bible is complete. It makes no difference how many of us disagree or how much we disagree on, it's has nothing to do with the matter at hand. But if we want to go that road, I could just as easily say the same of countinualist, I'm sure all of don't belive you can teach a person how to speak in tounges.

I belive tounges are genuine when I see them used as such.
Why would Paul need to tell the Corinthians that they won't need tounges anymore after Christ return, it would be obvious. Yet Paul is correcting the Corinthians on thier improper use of tounges.

The foreigners were the interpertators.

Diverse kinds of tounges is the same as saying diverse kinds of languages.
"Speaking in the tounges of angels" is a hyperbolic expression, Paul continues on to say " if I have not love, I'm like resounding gong."

W.E. Vine wrote: ……………..
“With the completion of Apostolic testimony and the completion of the Scriptures of truth (‘the faith once for all delivered to the saints,’ Jude 3, RV), ‘that which is perfect’ had come, and the temporary gifts were done away”.
(Commentary on First Corinthians, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1951, p. 184).

Finally, there is this very telling point. Those who profess to speak in tongues today reveal a woeful inconsistency. In their mission training schools, they must teach their missionaries to speak in the “tongues” of those nations they seek to evangelize. This practice demolishes their contention of being in possession of the miraculous gift of tongues, such as that exhibited on the day of Pentecost.
Can Christians "Speak in Tongues" Today?

 

[Jair Crawford]

So here we are debating something that wasn't a debate until the Holiness movement and after them the Pentecostal movement came onto the scene roughly give or take 1,800+ years into Christianity. Makes no sense that God would withhold the gift of prophecy for so long and from so many giants of the faith. Makes no sense considering the "fruit" of so many wanna be prophets. Continualism huh?

Ephesians 2:20 "having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone,"

So assuming continualism, to be consistent, we would have to assume a continuation of the offices of prophet and apostle, no?

No thanks, I'll pass.

Considering that a huge chunk of said 1800 years of church history was regulated to the early Roman Catholic Church who kept the lay people from reading and studying scriptures for themselves, why does this surprise you?

The history of the church and of religion is not an appropriate litmus test. The Holy Spirit and Scripture is. And Scripture clearly states "Earnestly seek the gift of prophecy" and "do not forbid the speaking of tongues".

 

[swordsman1]

Considering that a huge chunk of said 1800 years of church history was regulated to the early Roman Catholic Church who kept the lay people from reading and studying scriptures for themselves, why does this surprise you?

If the RC church was responsible for the suppression of the charismatic gifts then why didn't they reappear at the Reformation when there was a great movement of the Holy Spirit? It wasn't until the start of the twentieth century that people started claiming to have gifts that had previously ceased.

The history of the church and of religion is not an appropriate litmus test. The Holy Spirit and Scripture is. And Scripture clearly states "Earnestly seek the gift of prophecy" and "do not forbid the speaking of tongues".

Those verses don't say those gifts continue today. Paul was writing to a church which at the time still had those gifts present.

 

[Jair Crawford]

If the RC church was responsible for the suppression of the charismatic gifts then why didn't they reappear at the Reformation when there was a great movement of the Holy Spirit? It wasn't until the start of the twentieth century that people started claiming to have gifts that had previously ceased.



Those verses don't say those gifts continue today. Paul was writing to a church which at the time still had those gifts present.

It took time for the reformation to break out of certain religious traditions. Not being open to the gifts easily could have been one of them.

Scripture also does not assert that they have ceased. It says that they will one day cease but any assertion that they have is speculation.

 

[swordsman1]

It took time for the reformation to break out of certain religious traditions. Not being open to the gifts easily could have been one of them.

The Reformation broke away completely from the RC church and all it's trappings in the early 1600's. The Reformers were staunchly anti-Catholic. There were no lingering traditions in the Protestant church that prevented the Holy Spirit from reinstating these gifts if He wanted to. Yet the gifts did not reappear. Not until the beginning of the 20th century when people in the new Pentecostal movement suddenly claimed to possess such gifts (although their versions of the gifts do not match the biblical descriptions).

Scripture also does not assert that they have ceased. It says that they will one day cease but any assertion that they have is speculation.

Scripture doesn't say much about cessation because the gifts were still in operation when scripture was written. Even so scripture does say that prophecy, along with apostles, was only for the foundation of the church (Eph 2:20). Most people agree that apostles ceased (which is listed as a gift in 1 Cor 12:28) at the end of the apostolic age. And according to 1 Cor 13:8-10 when prophecy ceased so also would tongues, when 'completeness' came. See my previous post #29 on this thread to see what 'completeness' is.

 

[112358]

It took time for the reformation to break out of certain religious traditions. Not being open to the gifts easily could have been one of them.

Scripture also does not assert that they have ceased. It says that they will one day cease but any assertion that they have is speculation.

Both scripture and any amount of common sense assert cessation with absolute certainty. I extend the same invitation I have extended elsewhere to anyone here, or any of your brethren known to possess those gifts, to come to my city and heal my dying friend of his terminal cancer. And if that is not the gift which any of you possess, then please demonstrate which of those gifts you do possess. But of course, as is always the case, and contrary to the very purpose of the gifts, they are always for private interpretation or experience. they are never executed in plain sight for all to witness and marvel. They can never be proven without a doubt.

Watching Benny Hinn slap people across the forehead on TV does not a biblical sign gift make. This is one of the biggest blights to the truth that ever existed. It's what makes most of the secular world take one look at "Christianity" and dismiss it as a mythical fairy tale. Heartbreaking and infuriating.

 

[Jair Crawford]

Both scripture and any amount of common sense assert cessation with absolute certainty. I extend the same invitation I have extended elsewhere to anyone here, or any of your brethren known to possess those gifts, to come to my city and heal my dying friend of his terminal cancer. And if that is not the gift which any of you possess, then please demonstrate which of those gifts you do possess. But of course, as is always the case, and contrary to the very purpose of the gifts, they are always for private interpretation or experience. they are never executed in plain sight for all to witness and marvel. They can never be proven without a doubt.

Watching Benny Hinn slap people across the forehead on TV does not a biblical sign gift make. This is one of the biggest blights to the truth that ever existed. It's what makes most of the secular world take one look at "Christianity" and dismiss it as a mythical fairy tale. Heartbreaking and infuriating.

Your statement on scripture and common sense is in and of itself an assertion based on your interpretation. But let me ponder your invitation for a moment and subsequent comments;

Actually I share your frustration with celebrity TV "healers" like Hinn. I should aside that in my opinion, it is perfectly possible that Hinn has been able to lay hands on people and God heal them, but it's his turning it into a business that makes me question things.

That being said, I do not believe the gift of healing has ceased. I would have no problem laying hands on your friend and declaring healing in faith. I do not have much experience with this and I do not know all the answers to how God moves in these ways, but I believe He does move.

(I should also note that I am by NO means anti-doctor. That can be dangerous.)

I've heard people say that if people like Hinn truly had the gift of healing, he would be praying in hospitals not on TV. That could be true. But I can tell you that if God moves me to do so, I would LOVE to do just such a thing! People often use that as a rebuttal but I say, yes! Let's gather at the hospitals and see what He does!

Why not?

 

[bbbbbbb]

Although I have never encountered a genuine Christian healer I do know two things. First, the world is full of charlatans of all sorts who mock Christianity as they fleece the flock. Their judgement is sure and it is coming. Second, God in His providence does miraculously heal some rare individuals of physical diseases. Those whom I have known who have been healed give glory to God alone and confess that no other Christian was the means of their healing.

 

[112358]

Your statement on scripture and common sense is in and of itself an assertion based on your interpretation. But let me ponder your invitation for a moment and subsequent comments;

Actually I share your frustration with celebrity TV "healers" like Hinn. I should aside that in my opinion, it is perfectly possible that Hinn has been able to lay hands on people and God heal them, but it's his turning it into a business that makes me question things.

That being said, I do not believe the gift of healing has ceased. I would have no problem laying hands on your friend and declaring healing in faith. I do not have much experience with this and I do not know all the answers to how God moves in these ways, but I believe He does move.

(I should also note that I am by NO means anti-doctor. That can be dangerous.)

I've heard people say that if people like Hinn truly had the gift of healing, he would be praying in hospitals not on TV. That could be true. But I can tell you that if God moves me to do so, I would LOVE to do just such a thing! People often use that as a rebuttal but I say, yes! Let's gather at the hospitals and see what He does!

Why not?

Why not? Because if you or anyone else possessed the powers associated with healing that the apostles possessed, you wouldn't have to go to the hospital to find them. They would be beating down your door. You wouldn't be able to get away from them. They would cut a hole in your ceiling to get to you. They would look for every opportunity to pass under your shadow if nothing else.

If you were a qualified elder in a biblical congregation of the Lord's church I would gladly accept your invitation to lay hands on my friend and pray for healing. But if we did that under those circumstances, and my friend be healed, it would be through the work of the Lord, nothing else. That is entirely different than the healing the apostles were doing. It was THEM healing people through the power granted them by Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Those powers were for a specific purpose and time, and they died with the apostles.

 

[112358]

Although I have never encountered a genuine Christian healer I do know two things. First, the world is full of charlatans of all sorts who mock Christianity as they fleece the flock. Their judgement is sure and it is coming. Second, God in His providence does miraculously heal some rare individuals of physical diseases. Those whom I have known who have been healed give glory to God alone and confess that no other Christian was the means of their healing.

Exactly my point. If someone is healed it is by the hand of the Lord, no one else. That is entirely different than what the apostles were doing. They were healing people by their own hands, through the power granted them by Jesus Christ.

 

[Major1]

Your statement on scripture and common sense is in and of itself an assertion based on your interpretation. But let me ponder your invitation for a moment and subsequent comments;

Actually I share your frustration with celebrity TV "healers" like Hinn. I should aside that in my opinion, it is perfectly possible that Hinn has been able to lay hands on people and God heal them, but it's his turning it into a business that makes me question things.

That being said, I do not believe the gift of healing has ceased. I would have no problem laying hands on your friend and declaring healing in faith. I do not have much experience with this and I do not know all the answers to how God moves in these ways, but I believe He does move.

(I should also note that I am by NO means anti-doctor. That can be dangerous.)

I've heard people say that if people like Hinn truly had the gift of healing, he would be praying in hospitals not on TV. That could be true. But I can tell you that if God moves me to do so, I would LOVE to do just such a thing! People often use that as a rebuttal but I say, yes! Let's gather at the hospitals and see what He does!

Why not?

Common sense???

You are very correct and IF there was such a thing as faith healing by men, why do you think that we never ever see any of them in a hospital going from room to room healing everyone there.

We see them in football stadiums, and auditoriums and churches always taking up a "Love offering" but never in hospitals.

What does your common sense tell you????

 

[bbbbbbb]

Exactly my point. If someone is healed it is by the hand of the Lord, no one else. That is entirely different than what the apostles were doing. They were healing people by their own hands, through the power granted them by Jesus Christ.

Absolutely!

 

[Jair Crawford]

Exactly my point. If someone is healed it is by the hand of the Lord, no one else. That is entirely different than what the apostles were doing. They were healing people by their own hands, through the power granted them by Jesus Christ.

This has always seemed like semantics to me. Because both of those examples are really not at all that different, no?

Whether we pray for divine healing or are led by the Holy Spirit to lay hands on someone in faith that they be healed (as the apostles did), it is still God doing the healing.

 

[Jair Crawford]

Common sense???

You are very correct and IF there was such a thing as faith healing by men, why do you think that we never ever see any of them in a hospital going from room to room healing everyone there.

We see them in football stadiums, and auditoriums and churches always taking up a "Love offering" but never in hospitals.

What does your common sense tell you????

I honestly wouldn't be surprised if there are people who go to hospitals. We just don't hear about it because those people aren't interested in making a show of it, but interested in what God is doing.

As for the stadiums? Mammon.